In Re Wilhelm Elsner. In Re Keith W. Zary’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Laboratories Inc. (2007), Henny Penny Corporation v. Frymaster LLC (2019)
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on In re Gartside · Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc. · Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company v. Chemque, Inc. (Formerly Known as Chemque Canada, Ltd.) and Thomas & Betts Corporation, Defendants-Cross · In Re David C Paulsen · In re LeGrice
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“they key was whether the foreign sales of the plants placed the claimed invention in the hands of the public. Because the patented plant in Elsner could be reproduced from those sold to the foreign public, this, in effect”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“enables a person of skill in the art to practice asexual reproduction of the plant in a manner consistent with the statute can ... act as a 102(b) bar.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“circumvent the established rules that neither non-enabling publications nor foreign sales can bar one’s right to a patent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.